Such authors will now have to register with the state watchdog Roskomnadzor, disclose their real identity and follow the same rules as journalists working in conventional state-registered mass media.

The restrictions include the demand to verify information before publishing it and abstain from releasing reports containing slander, hate speech, extremist calls or other banned information such as, for example, advice on suicide. Also, the law bans popular bloggers from using obscene language, drawing heavy criticism and mockery from the online crowd.

So.., now you're not legally allowed to lie to a large number of people or incite violence based on those lies. Gee. That's bad how? Might be nice to have something like that in the West, because right now it's perfectly legal for FOX News to outright lie to their viewers.

Russia, like any large nation the US hates, (see Venezuela) must defend against the standard CIA tactics used to de-stabilize governments and population bases through grass roots propaganda tactics. Forcing creeps and liars out of the game seems like a pretty good way to do this. You don't want to be forced out? Then follow the law and back up your claims with fact checking verification of what you are writing, don't use hate speech and don't incite violence. How hard is that?

There's a reason you're not allowed to yell "Fire" in a crowded theater, and this falls neatly beneath the same rubric.

Honestly, think of the gossips and cruel kids in school spreading lies in deliberate attempts to undermine healthy energies. Putin has the guts to whip the carpet out from under such types.

So now, once you reach 3000 readers, the Russian government says you are a news source with real pull and must start acting in a manner befitting such responsibility. Is 3000 the right magic number to have picked? I don't know, but it makes perfect sense to draw a line somewhere.

Of course, any law can be abused, but right now I don't see this as an abuse. I see it as a sensible measure as Russia is under increasing media attack by a truly psychopathic nation whose leadership is completely disconnected from objective reality, has a tail-spinning economy and seemingly bottomless war lust. Of course you have to take measures to protect your populace from that kind of sickness.

But naturally, this proactive move is being spun with wicked and/or childish glee in the West (depending on whether you are CIA or just ignorant and easily led).

Moabz writes: There have been quite a few news reports about LENR lately. Unlike the drama about the Rossi e-cat, there seems to be a revival in legitimate scientific research into this area. University of Missouri is running a 5.5 million USD research project, and scientists at other institutes like Purdue, NASA, MIT, SRI, NRL are all looking into it.

A couple of days ago the Nuclear Energy Institute was talking about it on their facebook page and the American Nuclear Society posted a similar story on their "nuclear cafe". The University of Missouri will host a cold fusion conference in July this year and the topic will also be discussed in a talk at the upcoming "Nuclear & Emerging Technologies for Space (NETS-2013) organized by the ANS starting coming Monday.

Fantastic Lad writes: US district judge Katherine Forrest, in New York City's eastern district, found that section 1021 – the key section of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – which had been rushed into law amid secrecy and in haste on New Year's Eve 2011, bestowing on any president the power to detain US citizens indefinitely, without charge or trial, "facially unconstitutional". Forrest concluded that the law does indeed have, as the journalists and peaceful activists who brought the lawsuit against the president and Leon Panetta have argued, a "chilling impact on first amendment rights". Her ruling enjoins that section of the NDAA from becoming law.

Nobody seems to know for sure one way or the other, not the CEO who is still running tests to see, and not their detractors who can only speak in percentage certainties.

Prediction: When the question collapses into one state or the other, it will either turn out to be just an exotic classical computer, or it won't work at all. Because if it turned out to work as intended, then it would effectively prove that particles are both waves and particles and that we know what they are doing, and AFAIK that's against the rules.

What is usually going on in cases like this, (and they are far more frequent that you'd suspect) is that you're not going to look simply because you don't want to feel 'wrong' about something. In your mind, you honestly believe that if you don't see it, then you can maintain your illusion of reality. Most adults reach the emotional maturity of a five to eight year-old and then stop developing, and this is why such childish systems of management are so common among adults. This is not your fault. Society does this to you by design to keep you weak and ignorant.

It is the result of growing up in a hyper-competitive culture, in a school system which pits children against one another, causing them to build emotional and mental shields for protection.

I've done the work to move beyond that. As a result, I don't care about winning arguments. I care about knowing reality and sharing that knowledge with others who don't have it, such as yourself. I don't want your outrage and I certainly don't mind what you go away thinking.

But until you explore the world and the (easily) available material on a subject, it means your opinions on that subject are worth exactly nothing.

Those who profess wisdom while refusing to explore the world are insignificant. This is a sad truth. You can fix it, but it is a rare, rare thing when people actually do.

It takes a monumental amount of work to take down those walls and build new systems of spiritual management which will then allow the processing of actual knowledge.

I could be wrong, of course, but I'm probably not. In any case, please feel free to ignore and forget the preceding. This is for the benefit of others reading here as much as for your own.

Secondly, 2) if you knew that was such a fucking weak piece of evidence, why didn't you explain it in your original post, thereby diverting everybody who instantly thinks "wow this guy is wrong" reading it? So you're wrong and dumb.

No. People who are not programmed to be offended by these ideas would quickly recognize what I was talking about.

The question you could benefit from asking yourself is "Why am I reacting so strongly to this?"

The answer is this, and it's worth taking a long moment to consider this, because it may be the only truly important and valuable thing you will hear all year: There is a predator in your mind which knows that it is being threatened by ideas which would make you stronger and it weaker. It's response is to pump anger into your mind which you will mistake for your own. This is how it controls you. This is how it has always controlled you.

You are a prisoner. When you understand that, then you will have a chance of moving forward.

So what I come away with from this is, "My words don't mean what they say, they mean something else! If you can't figure out what that is, it's your own fault."

No, I was actually being relatively clear; more so than is normal around here. The fact is, I was specifically addressing another person who was using the fact that people generally hold different definitions for many common wordings to evade an idea s/he was uncomfortable with. It wasn't that this person did not understand; s/he did not WANT to understand.

You are doing something similar; you are deliberately getting hung up on inconsequential differences in the stream of communication while avoiding the central ideas, which if they were truly hard for you to grasp, you could ask for clarifications on. But instead you attack nonsense.

Yes. We've gone from having periodic famines to an having an obesity epidemic. Haven't you been paying attention?

We have rising standards of living around the world. That is how it worked out.

Oh dear.

If you think we are beyond famines, you will be having a very difficult awakening quite soon, I think. Our industrial revolution thus far has been a blip.

In any case, I wasn't being quite so literal, and I think you knew that. There is an economic crash still in progress, wars, homelessness and a general chaos wherein many millions of people are being squeezed ever more tightly. THAT is the end result of our activities in the industrialized West. It should have been a panacea, but instead people are losing their homes and going hungry.

Facts on the ground, right? THAT is how things are currently 'working' out, and this is all a direct result of our business practices wherein we treat people as though they are commodities.

You were talking about makework jobs inasmuch as the person you were responding to was talking about automation. Denying automation on the basis of creating/maintaining jobs is the definition of makework jobs. If you wanted to talk about something else, you should have made that clear, because nobody else was talking about that.

If you want to get hung up on definitions, then you will make no progress. I'm talking about something larger which does in fact make sense. Try to step outside the equation you have been taught, because that equation has resulted in the economic mess we are all living in at the moment. Clearly it doesn't work very well.

And tribalism is not the same as neighbourliness. Neighbourliness isn't exclusive. Tribalism is. Neighbourliness is also inherently limited in scope (people in New York are not the neighbours of people in California -- if they were, why wouldn't people in India be your neighbours?). Tribalism is not.

Sorry. I have no interest in diving into a nonsense semantic argument filled with revolving definitions. If you cannot understand the intent behind my words it is because you are being evasive. What good is that? It's the same as covering your eyes and singing loudly rather than learning. The old patterns have failed us. Why cling to them?

Typically a stay-at-home parents were still doing work; it's not a lifetime vacation.

Yes, and the work of parenting still needs to be done on top of the regular jobs mothers and fathers have to hold. The difference is that today there is less time and energy available for this exactly because both parents need to be working in order to earn a living income. This leads to exhaustion and a weakened family structure. I'm not sure what your point is.

Can you see how this plays into the economic structure? If people are having to work harder for the same end results, then the numerical price tag on a car is not a true reflection of its real cost.

Automation should result in a freeing up of time, but our time is tighter than ever. Clearly, the system is leaking wealth, and the point of that leak is the banking system with its usery/interest scam and the oligarchy which is milking the populace dry.

Sending jobs away without replacing them is just a symptom of a psychopathic system where people ignore the needs of the others in their community. That's a small piece of the puzzle, but it is very telling.

Try to grasp what I am saying here rather than seize on those definitions which do not happen to match your own. One can always find discrepancies among words.